Vote: FOR
Rationale: Voted FOR this proposal to make delegate compensation payments to the delegates who qualified in December. I am supportive of this program as it strengthens governance by rewarding delegates who make consistent and meaningful contributions.
Vote: FOR
Rationale: Voted FOR this proposal to approve the fourth and final milestone for the Rootstock Questhub. The team has been responsive and addressed all changes flagged by delegates. Axia also held a 1-1 call with Luis to walk through feedback, and appropriate updates were made following that discussion.
Vote: FOR
Rationale: Voted FOR this proposal to introduce a global wallet across Rootstock dApps. The proposal author @AndrewG incorporated delegate feedback, breaking milestones into clearer phases and reducing overall cost. Looking forward to tracking the impact of this global wallet.
Vote: AGAINST
Rationale: Voted Against this proposal because the author did not complete KYC, which is a prerequisite for receiving grant funding. In addition, the proposal lacks publicly verifiable information and does not clearly articulate a meaningful differentiator relative to existing swap aggregators already operating on Rootstock. The author’s decision to remain anonymous further compounds these concerns and reinforces the importance of completing the KYC process.
Vote: AGAINST
Rationale: Voted Against the release of Milestone 2 funding for the Self-Sovereign Identity App. Following discussions within the Collective, it is clear that the grant is not yet ready to advance to Milestone 2. Key requirements remain unmet, including regular reporting and progress updates, as well as consistency and clarity in the budget across milestones.
Vote: FOR
Rationale: Voted FOR the release of Milestone 3 funding for All-or-Nothing Crowdfunding. The team has successfully completed deliverables for the first two milestones and continues to be active and engaged both on the forum and on X. Looking forward to reviewing Milestone 3 outputs.
Vote: AGAINST
Rationale: Voted AGAINST this pilot program to enable circular economies to access bitcoin-backed credit (using RBTC as collateral) through Tropykus. There are several major concerns with this program, raised by delegates in the forum. Several major concerns were raised by delegates in the forum:
Insufficient liquidity: Tropykus does not currently have adequate USDRIF or DOC liquidity to support an additional $100k in lending without negatively impacting existing users and interest rates.
Limited scalability: The pilot targets only a handful of communities with no clear plan for scaling beyond the initial cohort, raising questions about the program’s long-term viability and impact.
While the concept of supporting bitcoin-backed circular economies has merit, these structural issues need to be addressed before committing DAO resources.
Vote: FOR
Rationale: Voted FOR this proposal to make delegate compensation payments to the delegates who qualified in January. I am supportive of this program as it strengthens governance by rewarding delegates who make consistent and meaningful contributions.
Vote: FOR
Rationale: Voted to fund Milestone 1 for SwapToX, a decentralized swap aggregator. The proposer has been responsive to questions and completed KYC. Rootstock users could benefit from more infrastructure that enables swapping through an aggregator rather than a single decentralized exchange.
One note: to verify completion of Milestone 1, the Collective will be reviewing the outcomes outlined in the proposal on the governance forum, not necessarily those included in the on-chain proposal. Ideally, the Milestone 1 outcomes should have been copied over to create an on-chain record, but I don’t see this as a dealbreaker for voting against the proposal.
Vote: FOR
Rationale: Voted FOR funding Milestone 3 for the Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI) Sandbox. After reviewing the M2 proof — which focused on establishing a qualified pipeline of Rootstock-aligned projects and initiating foundational support across technical feasibility, treasury/RIF strategy, and ecosystem mentorship — as well as @Kaf_Anode’s review of the M2 outcomes, it’s clear the project is ready to move forward to Milestone 3.
Vote: FOR
Rationale: Voted FOR to fund Milestone 2 to expand an existing decentralized identity infrastructure sandbox to a dApp on the Rootstock mainnet. Milestone 1 was delivered (testnet launch + CID storage contracts), and Milestone 2 is appropriately focused on security hardening (audit, fixes, gas profiling, fuzz/symbolic testing, and monitoring). Proposal author mrmtech clearly detailed milestone progress and improved clarity on scope and deliverables.
Vote FOR
Rationale Due to a likely block-timing shift in the voting end time, Axia was unable to cast a vote. Based on my review, the vote would likely have been FOR. Axia was waiting on the proposal author Francisco to share evaluation documents for all projects in the incubator under Milestone 2 KPIs. After review, the stated deliverables were met.
Vote: FOR
Rationale Due to a likely block-timing shift in the voting end time, Axia was unable to cast a vote. Based on my review, my vote would likely have been FOR. I had previously raised concerns about the lending aggregator pivot from real estate to cars; however, the proposal now discloses Zerem’s planned miniapp integration with Lemon, which could significantly expand Rootstock’s reach.
Voted FOR funding Milestone 1 for SwapToX, a decentralized swap aggregator. This is a revised Milestone 1 proposal, building on the original submission that I also supported. The updated version strengthens the scope by adding an objective to deploy liquidity sorting and quotation bots, which will enhance the swap algorithm and improve stability.
Voted FOR this proposal to make delegate compensation payments to the delegates who qualified in February. I am supportive of this program as it strengthens governance by rewarding delegates who make consistent and meaningful contributions.
Voted AGAINST this proposal for Rootstock Collective to sponsor the CryptoVendimIA conference. I recognize the conference’s recognition and positive track record, however the timeline for this sponsorship proposal is too compressed: the event is scheduled to start on March 25, the proposal only reached the forum on March 2, and the vote went on-chain on March 11. In addition, there is a discrepancy between the 10k sponsorship ask on the forum and the 7.5k amount in the on-chain vote. Wishing the organizers all the best and perhaps next year Rootstock can participate as a sponsor.
Voted AGAINST this proposal for Rootstock Collective to sponsor the CryptoVendimIA conference. In line with the rationale for voting against the previous proposal, the timeline is too compressed. The conference is slated to start on March 25th however the vote will not end until March 26th.
Voted AGAINST the proposal to establish Rootstock India.
This vote is not a judgment on the proposal’s merit — it’s a process issue. The authors moved to an on-chain vote less than 24 hours after posting on the forum, which does not meet Rootstock’s governance standards.
Should the authors resubmit with the appropriate process followed, I will review and consider it.
Voted FOR this proposal to introduce a 90% maximum allocation to backers.
This is a sensible, light-touch parameter change that addresses a real incentive problem: builders competing for backing by giving away 100% of their rewards. The mechanism already exists at the protocol level — this proposal simply activates it via governance. This proposal also reflects internal alignment between the Collective and Labs — authored by Tamara and supported by Toby — grounded in signal from builders and the ecosystem.
Voted FOR this proposal to introduce a BTC Vault in Sandbox Mode on the Rootstock Collective dApp. The sandbox will create a controlled environment to test yield generation strategies on rBTC at practically no cost to the DAO. The community gets the opportunity to test a prototype, the treasury carries almost no risk, and RLabs gets feedback.
Voted AGAINST this proposal to conduct educational workshops across India. Although the proposal authors are qualified and India is an important geography for Rootstock to have presence in, the scale of this proposal does not seem feasible. In the Bitcoin India Tour deck that was shared, the team completed 76 events in 2025. In this proposal, the team is proposing 55 events over 5 months (April to August). That is 11 events/month compared to 6.3 events/month in 2025.
Voted FOR this proposal to make delegate compensation payments to the delegates who qualified in March. I am supportive of this program as it strengthens governance by rewarding delegates who make consistent and meaningful contributions.
Duplicate proposal — voted AGAINST
I have been following this grant closely. After reviewing Milestone 1 deliverables and the scoped Milestone 2 deliverables, I support SwaptoX moving forward with its plans for Milestone 2 which include routing algorithms, upgrading USD token logic. router contract governance upgrades, and audit planning in preparation for Milestone 3.